I first mentioned the trust gap in these pages on April 6, 2012. Since then, it has grown wider. It has become obvious that we live in an era of entwined big government, big business, and big data. That entanglement has emerged into the daylight as we learned about the extent of surveillance designed to deter terrorist attacks. This effort linked over 1,000 government organizations with over 1,000 private contractors which together had over 1, 000,000 employees with top secret security clearances. We also learned that these entities monitor the communications of private citizens both in this country and elsewhere'

This situation prompts me to ask all of you several questions. Do you trust the United States government and corporations to guard your privacy? Has this country ever conducted a public forum to debate the trade-offs involved when your personal data or communications are scrutinized or accumulated? Do you trust the National Security Agency, the FBI, or Facebook to handle the personal data they have collected in a responsible manner?

Enough Americans have answered no to these and similar questions to pry the trust gap farther apart. In 1958, when I was entering college, over 70 percent of our citizens reported that they trusted their government. Then Vietnam and Watergate arrived, setting off a downward plunge. Last week a poll reflected that only 15 percent to 20 percent of our people trusted their government. That is an over-80-percent vote of mistrust. No wonder we have gridlock.

Furthermore, the approval rating for the U.S. Congress is just 10 percent, the lowest in the history of polling on this subject. Wall Street's ratings are even lower. Together these numbers indicate that both our political and economic systems are in danger far greater than that represented by terrorists.

The executive branch of the federal government for almost two decades has employed secret opinions by the Department of Justice, secret rulings from a secret court (see: FISA Forever, 2/1/13), and secret briefings for select members of Congress (they are not permitted to reveal the details to anyone) to secretly expand its powers of surveillance initially granted under Section 215 of the U.S.A. Patriot Act.

While this was taking place, the banking system has been lobbying (generally successfully) to water down regulations. They have also issued misleading statements about the safety of their balance sheets (even after the crisis of 2008-9), and cloaked transactions with opaque derivatives. Both the government and corporations, especially financial ones, have employed deception, obfuscation, and outright lying to keep the public from finding out what was really going on. The public seems justified in assuming that an oligarchy of special interests have conspired to co-opt government for their own benefit.

If the trust gap is to be closed, restorative action have to follow at least two avenues. First, there will have to be a great deal more transparency concerning government actions, especially in the area of surveillance. The idea that secrecy means safety doesn't work in a democracy. "Trust us, we have foiled dozens of attacks" is not an acceptable response. "Information only provides aid and comfort to the enemy" is no longer a credible attitude. Citizens need to know specifically what the Patriot Act has authorized, and what the government-corporate-cyber complex is up to.

Second, uncoupling special interests from heavy participation in governance will be an even more difficult process. It will require comprehensive campaign finance reform, a complete redesign of the tax code, and simpler, more effective regulations. There are other trust-gap-closing measures that are needed for finances, entitlements, and health care costs, just to name a few.

The trust gap is a high-priority problem. For our democracy and capitalism to function, it will have to shrink. Let us hope that our 237th birthday year will initiate a trend reversal.